Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Aug. 16, 2022

Cruz v. La Lomita Mexican Deli Corp.

Judge
Ona Wang
Docket
1:21-cv-07780
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Cruz v. La Lomita, Judge Wang directed the parties to submit their proposed settlement for court approval with supporting fairness and fee information.

Who this affects

The parties to the case, including plaintiffs Juan Cruz and Humberto Guerra and the defendants, were required to jointly submit the proposed settlement and supporting materials.

What happened

In Cruz v. La Lomita Mexican Deli Corp., the court was told that the parties had reached a settlement. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims or settlement terms.

The court ordered the parties to jointly submit a proposed settlement agreement by September 12, 2022. They also had to explain why the agreement was fair and reasonable and provide information about how the settlement amount was calculated and detailed billing records supporting any attorney-fee request.

Judge Ona T. Wang did not approve the settlement in this order. She ordered the parties to submit it for court review.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Cruz v. La Lomita Mexican Deli Corp. · No. 1:21-cv-07780
Judge
Ona Wang
Date
Aug. 16, 2022

Background

The court was advised that the parties had reached a settlement. The caption identifies Juan Cruz and Humberto Guerra as plaintiffs suing individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, and La Lomita Mexican Deli Corp. and other defendants. The opinion does not state the underlying claims or the settlement's terms.

Court-Ordered Submission

The court ordered the parties to jointly submit a proposed settlement agreement for approval by September 12, 2022. The parties were required to attach an executed settlement agreement and a joint letter explaining why the agreement was fair and reasonable under the standard discussed in Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House, Inc.

The letter also had to give enough detail about the method used to determine the settlement amount and include detailed billing records supporting any request for attorney fees.

Disposition

The order required submission of the proposed settlement for court approval. It did not approve or reject the settlement, award attorney fees, or decide the underlying claims.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.